[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1998, Book I)]
[June 2, 1998]
[Pages 857-863]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]
Remarks in a Roundtable Discussion on the 2000 Census in Houston, Texas
June 2, 1998
The President. Thank you. Thank you for that wonderful welcome, and
thank you, Marta, for the wonderful work you're
doing here. I enjoyed my tour. I enjoyed shaking hands with all the
folks who work here and the people who are taking advantage of all your
services. And I'm glad to be here. Mr. Mayor, you can be proud, and I know you are proud of this
center and the others like it in this city.
I'd like to thank all the Members of Congress who are here from the
Texas delegation, and a special thanks to Representatives
Maloney and Sawyer for coming from Washington with me today and for their
passionate concern to try to get an accurate census.
I thank the Texas land commissioner, Garry Mauro, for being here; and the members of the legislature,
Senator Gallegos, Senator Ellis, Congressman--Representative Torres, and others, if they're here; the other city officials;
Mr. Boney, the president of the city
council; Mr. Eckels, the county executive
judge; Rueben Guerrero, the SBA Regional
Administrator. If there are others--I think our Deputy Secretary of
Commerce, Mr. Mallett, is here, who is
from Houston. I thank you all for being here.
Before I say what I want to say about the census, I think since this
is the first time I have been in Texas since the fires began to rage in
Mexico that have affected you, if you'll forgive me, I'd like to just
say a word about that. The smoke and the haze from these fires has
become a matter of serious concern for people in Texas and Louisiana and
other Gulf
[[Page 858]]
States. It has gotten even further up into our country. And of course,
the greatest loss has been suffered by our friends and neighbors across
the border in Mexico. Now, we are doing everything we know to do to
help, both to help the people of Mexico and to stem the disadvantageous
side effects of all the smoke and haze coming up here into the United
States.
I had an extended talk with President Zedillo about it. And, of course, here we had the EPA and
Health and Human Services and FEMA monitoring the air quality. We're
working very hard with the Mexican Government to help them more
effectively fight these fires. We provided more than $8 million in
emergency assistance to Mexico since January, with 4 firefighting
helicopters, an infrared imaging aircraft to detect fire hotspots,
safety, communications, and other firefighting equipment for over 3,000
firefighters. Over 50 experts from our Federal agency have provided
important technical advice. And tomorrow our Agriculture Secretary, Dan
Glickman, and our AID Administrator, Brian
Atwood, are going to Mexico to see these
fires firsthand and to see what else we can do in consultation with
Mexican officials.
I think that we will be successful, but this has been a long and
frustrating thing. As you probably know, we've had extended fires over
the last year in Southeast Asia as well and in South America. This is a
terrific problem that requires change in longstanding habits on the part
of many people in rural areas in a lot of these countries, but it also
is a function of the unusual weather conditions through which we have
been living. And we'll continue to work on it.
Now, let's talk about the census. Since our Nation's founding, the
taking of the census has been mandated by the Constitution. How we have
met this responsibility has changed and evolved over time as the country
has grown in size and population, and as we've learned more about how to
count people. Today I want to talk about the newest changes that we
propose to make and how important it is to your work and your community.
That's why we're here, so that we can put a human face on the census and
its consequences.
We do this every 10 years. The first time we had a census, Thomas
Jefferson, who was then the Secretary of State, actually sent Federal
marshals out on horseback to count heads. We relied on this system of
sending workers out to count our people, household by household, person
by person, for nearly two centuries. But as the population grew and
people began to move more frequently, this process became increasingly
both inefficient and ineffective, even as it became progressively more
expensive. By the time we finished counting, we'd have to start all over
again for the next census.
In 1970, therefore, we started counting people by mail. For three
decades now, Americans have been asked to fill out census forms that
come in the mail and send them back for processing. Now we know that
this method, too, needs to be updated. For a variety of reasons,
millions of people, literally millions of people, did not send their
1990 census form back. For the first time, the census in 1990 was less
accurate than the one before it. Before that, the census had become
increasingly more accurate.
We know now that the census missed 8 million Americans living in
inner cities and in remote rural areas. We know, too, interestingly
enough, that it double-counted 4 million Americans, many of whom had the
good fortune to own 2 homes. [Laughter] The number of people not counted
in Los Angeles--in Los Angeles alone--was enough to fill a city as big
as Tallahassee, the capital of Florida. The census missed 482,738 people
in the State of Texas, 66,748 of them here in Houston.
Now, if we are really going to strengthen our country and prepare
for this new century, we have to have a full and accurate picture of who
we are as a people and where we live. We rely on census statistics every
day to determine where to build more roads and hospitals and child care
centers, and to decide which communities need more Federal help for Head
Start or Federal training programs, or for the WIC program.
Marta and I just visited your WIC program here
in this center, and we saw a baby being weighed and measured. The baby
liked being weighed more than it liked being measured. I don't blame
him. [Laughter]
The WIC program is just one example. The Congress, with all the
fights that we've had over the last 6 years, we've had pretty good
success in getting a bipartisan majority to continue to put more money
into the WIC program, because people know that it makes good sense to
feed babies and take care of them and provide for them when they're
young. But the funds, once appropriated, can only flow where they're
needed if there is an accurate count of where the
[[Page 859]]
kids are. So, ironically, no matter how much money we appropriate for
WIC, unless we actually can track where the children are, the program
will be less than fully successful.
Now, more than half of the undercounted in the last census were
children. A disproportionate number of undercounted Americans were
minorities. That means some of our most vulnerable populations routinely
are omitted when it comes time to providing Federal funds for critical
services. An inaccurate census distorts our understanding of the needs
of our people, and in many respects, therefore, it diminishes the
quality of life not only for them but for all the rest of us as well.
That's why we have to use the most up-to-date, scientific, cost-
effective methods to conduct an accurate census. That's why--to go back
to what Congressman Green said--we should follow
the National Academy of Sciences' recommendations to use statistical
sampling in the next census.
Scientists and statisticians are nearly unanimous in saying that
statistical sampling is the best way to get a full and fair count of our
people for the 2000 census. It is estimated that if we use good
statistical sampling, supplemented by what are called quality checks,
where you go out into selected neighborhoods and actually count heads to
make sure that the sampling is working, that we can cut the error rate
to a tenth of a percent, or that in the next sample we would miss, out
of a country of nearly 300 million people by then, only 300,000, as
opposed to 8 million in the 1990 census.
Now, as far as I know, nobody in this room had anything to do with
coming up with this proposal. All of us just want an accurate count.
Whatever the count is, wherever the people are, this is not a political
issue; this is an American issue. But the people who know what they're
doing tell us that this is the way we should do it. There is no serious
dispute among the experts here.
It is, therefore, I think, quite unfortunate that some in Congress
have so vociferously opposed sampling, because improving the census
shouldn't be a partisan issue. It's not about politics; it's about
people. It's about making sure every American really and literally
counts. It's about gathering fair and accurate information that we
absolutely have to have if we're going to determine who we are and what
we have to do to prepare all our people for the 21st century.
In Texas, I would think every Republican would be just as interested
as every Democrat in seeing that every Texan is counted, so that this
State does not lose another billion dollars--or maybe 2 or 3 billion
dollars by then--in undercounting, in ways that will help you to meet
the challenge of your growing population and to seize the opportunities
that are out there for all of you.
So that's what we're here for. And all the folks on this panel, I
want to thank them in advance for their willingness to be here, because
I'm basically just going to listen to them now give you what I hope will
be a fuller picture of what the consequences of this whole census issue
are in very stark, clear human terms. But remember, it's not a political
issue; it's a people issue. Nobody has got an ax to grind for any
method; we should all want the most accurate method. And when it's all
said and done, all we should want is to have every one of us properly,
accurately, fairly, and constitutionally counted.
Thank you very much. [Applause] Thank you.
Well, as I said earlier, everybody here, around this panel, has a
different perspective on the importance of the census. And I would like
to hear some specific illustrations now about how the census is used and
why the accuracy is important. And maybe we should start with Dr. Craven
and with Dr. Kendrick--if you could start.
[Dr. Judith Craven, president, United Way of
the Texas Gulf Coast in Houston, explained the importance of accurate
census numbers to funding for services in the area.]
The President. So this is very important because--so what you're
saying is, when United Way funds are distributed, private funds----
Dr. Craven. That's correct.
The President. ----you need the census, first of all, to tell you
where the problems are, and secondly, to know how much to give.
Dr. Craven. How much to give and how we can leverage what's already
being done by the Government, and making sure that Government dollars
have come in an equitable amount to leverage and maximize the resources
here to deliver those services.
The President. This as an important point because it's something you
almost never hear, that
[[Page 860]]
because of the work of United Ways all over America, and because of the
way they work, and because of the generosity of the American people, if
the census is inaccurate, it has an indirect, bad effect on private
investment in people, in community needs, as well as on Government
investment.
Dr. Kendrick.
[Dr. Mary des Vignes-Kendrick,
director, City of Houston Health Department, said that accurate census
data was critical to public health and described its use in calculating
community health data to identify problems, target resources, and
measure the impact of interventions.]
The President. Thank you very much. Maybe we could be a little more
specific about what some of the specific repercussions are, or have
been, as a result of the undercount in the 1990 census.
Mr. Moreno, could you respond to that?
[Gilbert Moreno, president and chief
executive officer, Association for the Advancement of Mexican-Americans,
described the impact that the census would have on the Mexican-American
community.]
The President. Dr. Mindiola.
[Dr. Tatcho Mindiola, Jr., director,
Center for Mexican-American Studies at the University of Houston,
applauded the President's support of the statistical sampling method,
explaining that the area of Houston in which the discussion was being
held was likely to be undercounted if traditional methods were used.]
The President. Thank you.
Reverend Clemons.
[Rev. Harvey Clemons, Jr., pastor,
Pleasant Hill Baptist Church, described how an accurate and
comprehensive census count would help provide the tools needed to bring
about community revitalization in hard-to-develop areas which had been
traditionally undercounted.]
The President. What about the business community? Ms. Joe, would you
like to talk about that?
[Ms. Glenda Joe of Great Wall Enterprises, a
marketing, advertising, and public relations firm catering to Asian-
American markets and demographics, said that inaccurate census data
discouraged corporate ventures and investment in the region and also
reduced funding allocations for Asian nonprofit organizations. She noted
that the sharp growth of the Asian-American community in the Gulf Coast
region of Texas had not been accurately reflected in the census.]
The President. If I might say--this is a problem--this particular
problem she has mentioned is a bigger problem with Asian-Americans than
with any other minority group, but it is also a general problem in the
work that we're trying to do around the country in revitalizing the
inner cities.
If you look at the American unemployment rate now, which is about
4.3 percent--it's the lowest it's been since 19--I think '74, '73,
something like that, now--and when I became President, the conventional
theory among economists--we had these huge arguments, I remember, after
I was elected in '92 and before I took office, and we got everybody down
around the table at the Governor's Mansion in Little Rock and talked
about this. Conventional economic wisdom was that if unemployment
dropped much below 6 percent, you would have terrible inflation, the
economy would be in bad shape, and we'd have to run it back up again.
Well, the American people have proved that that's not so, through
high levels of productivity and technology. But then you ask yourself,
well, how can we keep this economy growing now that--if the national
unemployment rate is down to 4.3 percent? How can we grow the economy
without inflation? The obvious answer is, go to the places where the
unemployment rate is still higher, where people will work for
competitive wages, and where they can create markets because they do
have money to spend if people invest it there.
So, you see this also in Hispanic communities in places like Los
Angeles, where we've put together a $400 million community development
bank to go into these neighborhoods and make small loans to
entrepreneurs to start businesses. You see it in these community
development banks we've put up in New York and elsewhere. In New York
City, the unemployment rate is still almost 9 percent, so obviously
there is an enormous opportunity there for growth. And a lot of the
unemployed people in New York are Hispanic, African-American, Asians,
people from the Caribbean--not counted. So you go and you say, ``Well,
make me a loan, and I'll go start
[[Page 861]]
this kind of business, and there are this thousand many people in my
neighborhood and in my market area.'' And somebody picks up a census and
says, ``No, there are not, there are only half that many.''
So this is a free enterprise issue as well, because I'm convinced
that we have an opportunity that we've not had in 30 years to really
crack the unemployment and the underemployment problem and the lack of
business ownership in inner cities throughout this country. But to do
it, even if you have generous and sympathetic bankers and a Government
program that says you're supposed to target low-income areas, you've got
to know what the market is.
So it's a problem--the one you said is not just specific to you in
here, it's a huge general problem throughout America that an accurate
count would help. So it actually, I believe, would help us to keep the
growth of the economy going and help us to lower the unemployment rate
further by knowing where investment capital could flow.
Let me just ask--and I guess I'd like to start with Dr.
Klineberg because he started the Houston
area survey--how possible do you think it is to get an accurate survey,
and what do you think--what steps need to be taken? And what arguments
do you think we could make to the skeptics who say no statistician with
a computer can compete with people going around door-to-door and
counting heads?
This is a--you know, it's kind of like a--it's not an easy argument
to win. You know, the average person, you just come up to somebody and
say, ``We're here to figure out how many people are in this room. Would
you think it would be better to have an expert look in the room and
guess or have somebody walk up and down the rows and count?'' So we've
got to figure out how to--we've got to win this argument with average
American people who aren't used to thinking about these sort of things.
And we have to prove that we can do it. So maybe we ought to talk about
where we go from here. But, Doctor, would you like to say a few things?
[Stephen Klineberg, professor of
sociology, Rice University, described how the census was used and why
accuracy was important to the work of sociology and political science in
understanding America at a time of great demographic change, from an
amalgam of European nationalities to an amalgam of worldwide
nationalities. Reverend Clemons
commended the President for his support of statistical sampling, but
urged collecting detailed data in the census.]
The President. Let me ask you another way, because this is where I
think--obviously, I'm here in part because I was--because I wanted to
come here to illustrate the importance of the census. I'm also here in
part, to be candid, because the outcome of this battle is not clear. We
all know that. That's why Congressman Sawyer and Congresswoman Maloney
came all the way from Washington with me today.
And suppose I got all of you, and I put you in a van. We all got in
the van; we drove across town; and we stopped at a little real estate
office. The people had never had any contact at all with the census
except they always filled out their form--or we stopped in a service
station, and we met a couple guys that--they never thought about this
issue for 5 minutes. They're not conscious that it affects them at all.
How can we convince ordinary citizens in all the congressional
districts, whether they're represented by Republicans or Democrats,
without regard to party, that statistical sampling will give them a more
accurate count than hiring 6 million people to go door to door? What can
you say that is consistent with the experience of ordinary working
Americans that will make them understand that?
Dr. Mindiola.
Dr. Mindiola. Mr. President, if I
were you I would tell them this story. Most Americans, I think the vast
majority of Americans, go for medical checkups, and during that process,
they do a blood test. But when you go get your blood test, the doctor or
the nurse does not draw 100 percent of your blood out of your body. They
draw a sample. And based upon that sample--[laughter]--and based upon
that sample, they can tell your cholesterol level, whether you have too
much acid in your blood, et cetera, et cetera. And I think in those
common, everyday terms, the average American citizen should be able to
understand the validity of sampling, because that's a common, everyday
experience,
The President. That may go down in history as the Dracula theory of
the census. [Laughter] That's pretty good, though.
Go ahead, Marta.
[[Page 862]]
[Marta Moreno, director, Magnolia Multi-Service
Center, a Woman, Infants, and Children (WIC) program facility, stated
the importance of making people feel comfortable with filling out the
census form and advocated public service announcements to achieve that
goal. She also suggested hiring minority census personnel to improve
communication with the households visited.]
The President. Gilbert.
Mr. Moreno. I think that transportation
ultimately is one of the most impacted areas, and boy, in Houston if
you're sitting in that rush hour traffic, you're going to have our vote,
because you're sitting in bumper-to-bumper traffic in 100 degree
weather.
The President. So you'd make a practical argument.
Mr. Moreno. It is. Houston, as you know,
is the fourth fastest growing city in sheer numbers. Dallas is third.
The towns in south Texas are growing at an incredible rate, and they're
stacked on a very poor highway that links those cities.
The President. We're trying to build you one, though.
Mr. Moreno. Yes, exactly. It's dangerous
to drive from San Antonio to Houston on a Sunday night because the
traffic is just stacked.
The President. You know, one of the things that I find works
sometimes is the analogy to political polling. I mean, most people
understand that a poll taken before an election is a statistical sample.
And sometimes it's wrong, but more often than not it's right. And there
you may only sample a thousand people out of millions of voters. I mean,
there are ways to do this, but I just think--I wish you would all think
about it because, again--the other point that I think is important that
a lot of you have pointed out is that, a lot of people, you can send all
the forms you want to their house, and they either won't or can't fill
out the forms. And we know that in some cases, almost--and maybe even
without an attempt to deceive, people have gotten census forms if they
have a vacation home or two homes, so that ironically, the most
overcounted people tended to be upper income people who would be the
least likely to benefit from a lot of these investments, and they might
have innocently filled out the forms twice, not necessarily wanting to
be overcounted, and just done it.
So I think that that's--the other thing is to point out that people
are moving all the time, and sometimes people aren't home, and sometimes
somebody is home and somebody is not, which means that even if you
thought sending out 10 million people to physically count the other 200
and--how many people did you say we were--268 million of us--it may not
be physically possible to do. So that even if you could do it, even if
we could put 10 or 15 or 20 million people on the street for a couple of
months, it might do no more of an accurate job than a very good sample.
The only place I know that probably got a good head count recently--
well, you may have seen the press, where they have a much more
controlled society, where people don't get to move around on their own,
is Iraq, where they shut the whole country down for a day. You remember
that? Nobody moves; everybody stays home; kids have to play in front of
their house--stay there. That doesn't seem to me to be a practical
alternative for us. [Laughter]
Glenda.
[Ms. Joe said it was necessary to convince
citizens that the accuracy derived from statistical sampling would serve
their self-interest. Reverend Clemons
agreed that minorities were reluctant to answer the census because they
believed the information would do harm rather than good and that
reversing that perception was essential. Dr. Mindiola stated that the census was not a political issue since
people who were not willing to fill out a census form were also not
likely to vote. Dr. des Vignes-Kendrick commended facilities such as the Magnolia Multi-Service
Center and underscored the need for accurate census data in order to
more fully serve their communities. She stated that if census data could
be demonstrated to link service, resources, and opportunity to the
community, participation would increase.]
Mr. Moreno. Mr. President, we're about
out of time, but we did want to thank you tremendously for your visit to
the East End of Houston. This is a real historic visit. It's my
understanding that you're the first President since FDR to visit and
so----
The President. Is that right?
Mr. Moreno. Hopefully, it won't be that
long again.
The President. Thank you. Let me say one other thing. I would like
to close this--thank
[[Page 863]]
you all for your participation, and thank all of you--but I would like
to close by putting this issue even in a larger context if I might, just
to close.
To me, having an accurate census is a big part of having a strategy
for racial reconciliation in America and building one American community
that works. Why? Because if people feel they're undercounted, and they
don't get--their children don't get the help they need, whether it's an
education or health care or whatever--it will breed, inevitably, a sense
of resentment, a sense of unfairness, a sense that people aren't really
part of the mainstream and the future. And this is really important.
I know a lot of people think I'm obsessed with this, but I think the
fact that we are growing more diverse as the world gets smaller is an
enormous, enormous asset for the United States in the 21st century if we
really live together on terms of the quality and harmony and
cooperation--and if we're growing together, not being split apart.
But if you look at what I have to spend my time doing as your
President when I deal with countries around the world, how much of it is
dealing with people who are burdened down with group resentments? Why
were we all rejoicing when the Irish voted for the peace accord? Because
the Catholics and the Protestants had given up their group resentment to
work together for a unified future. What is the problem in Kosovo, a
place that most Americans had never heard of before a few months ago?
Ethnic Albanians and Serbs fighting over group resentments. What was
Bosnia about? The same thing. What is going on in the Middle East? What
is the dynamic within India now? It's just all in the news because of
the nuclear test, where you have a Hindu party claiming that the Hindus
historically have been insufficiently respected and oppressed by the
Muslim minority, and you have group resentments.
I mean, this whole world is so full of people's resentments because
they think that the group they're a part of is not getting a fair deal
from everybody else if they happen to be bigger or richer or whatever.
We have--with all of our problems in America--we have slowly,
steadily, surely been able to chip away at all of the those barriers and
come together. That, in the end, may be the largest issue of all about
the census: Can we succeed in building one America without knowing who
we are, how many we are, where we are, and what kind of situation we're
living in? I think the answer to that is, it will be a lot harder. And
if we do it right, we'll be a lot stronger.
Thank you all, and God bless you.
Note: The President spoke at 11:40 a.m. at the Magnolia Multi-Service
Center. In his remarks, he referred to Mayor Lee Brown of Houston; State
Senators Mario Gallegos, Jr., and Rodney Ellis; State Representative
Gerard Torres; Jew Don Boney, Jr., president, Houston City Council;
Robert A. Eckels, Harris County Commissioners Court; and President
Ernesto Zedillo of Mexico.